Do ends justify NSA means?

June 11, 2013

I’ve often criticized Steve Chapman for what I feel are poor libertarian arguments. But his Sunday piece on National Security Administration surveillance (“The unstoppable spread of surveillance,” Columns, June 9) makes a very cogent libertarian point. Government shouldn't trample innocent individuals' rights while trying to prevent crimes.

If preventing terrorst attacks were the only criteria for surveillance, as politicians in both political parties imply when defending it, our individual rights could soon be reduced to nothing.

The dystopian snowball bears the familiar ring of recent gun control debates. Government firearm confiscation would probably reduce crime, despite infringing on personal freedoms guaranteed by the Second Amendment. But do such policies’ ends justify the means?